Official announcement soon.I’m told we’re going to see an official announcement for the Canon EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x lens soon. I’m told once production (availability in May) of the EF 500 f/4L IS II & EF 600 f/4L IS II are going strong, the new zoom will be officially announced. Expect stock to arrive fairly quickly after the announcement.

Expected retail price is around $11,000 USD.

EF 24-70 f/2.8L II
I’m still hearing a release date of April 17, 2012 for the new version of a classic. Everything I have been told about this lens has been unbelievably positive. I’ve heard “best zoom Canon has ever made”, “fastest focusing” & “unbelievably sharp” on numerous occasions.

smirkypants

I'm going to make sure i'm lying down when i see the price they retail for here in australia

If it's $11,000/US that's 77% more than I paid for my Nikon 200-400/f4 refurbished. The $4800 difference can't possibly be worth it.... I still can't believe this lens made my buy a Nikon. It kind of makes me fume.

I must say that when the first mention of this lens was made (pre-announcement announcement thingy) - a shiver ran down my spine! I thought "Now THAT could be a great lens! Some serious birding / distant wildlife potential in a lens, right there!" I applaud Canon on the idea of a built in tele-converter.... which I expect is tailored to the lens' optics.

Of course I knew the price would be high.... initially I thought / heard maybe around $7k / $8k. But it appears it could be more than that, from what we're hearing.

Wickidwombat... I know what you mean! It might end up being worth a trip to another country (eg Hong Kong, SE Asia, US, etc) to source it, if the price difference in Australia is so big. Even after paying import duty / tax ... one can still save this way. Only thing is you might not have a local warrantee......

Smirkypants, when you cite 77% more than your Nikon 200-400 f4, of course a number of factors come into play: a) you have a refurbished item that is always cheaper, b) the Nikon lens is an older design / model (so while it's a good lens from all accounts, it's street price is understandably lower than a new lens), c) the Nikon doesn't have the dedicated and built in 1.4x teleconverter!

The Canon 100-400mm lens design isn't my style. Plus I either preferred a 'very portable telezoom' or a 'quality large superzoom'. The 100-400mm didn't quite fit either camp in my book, but I know it works for many people, I bought the Canon 70-300mm L IS USM, which I'm very happy with. Awesome image quality, very portable and gives me great flexibility (up to 480mm equivalent on my 7D).

Of course, the Canon 200-400mm is going to be a BIG lens, and I probably won't buy it - seeing as I would rather use $11k (or more?!) for other purposes, eg donating to charities, supporting friends that live in developing countries, as well as other things in my own life. However maybe I'll rent it sometime... it would be awesome to have a day or weekend dedicated to some birding with such this lens.

I look forward to seeing some reviews... and more importantly photos from this lens when it (eventually!) becomes available.

Regards,

Paul

Logged

I appreciate using my 7D and 350D cameras along with a host of lenses & many accessories to capture quality photos, and share with friends.

hmm, retailers here in Japan are still saying the 24-70 mk2 is getting released on April 30th, but I do hope you are right that it comes out on the 17th as I want to pick it up in time for a friend's wedding on teh 29th.

This certainly appears to be a wonderful piece of glass but I wonder why the Nikon equivalent is 5,000.00 less? Seeing how the new prices of glass have rose dramatically I panicked and bought one of the last 500 F4 version 1 in December new. I'm glad I made this early venture because I knew I wouldn't be able to afford the 5 digits that are becoming very common.

</strong>I’m told we’re going to see an official announcement for the Canon EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x lens soon. I’m told once production (availability in May) of the EF 500 f/4L IS II & EF 600 f/4L IS II are going strong, the new zoom will be officially announced. Expect stock to arrive fairly quickly after the announcement.</p><p>Expected retail price is around $11,000 USD.</p><p><strong>EF 24-70 f/2.8L II

smirkypants

Smirkypants, when you cite 77% more than your Nikon 200-400 f4, of course a number of factors come into play: a) you have a refurbished item that is always cheaper, b) the Nikon lens is an older design / model (so while it's a good lens from all accounts, it's street price is understandably lower than a new lens), c) the Nikon doesn't have the dedicated and built in 1.4x teleconverter!Paul

a. Older design: May 2010 is an old design?b. Refurbished: It's $7000 new (street) and the list is $8400. Still a huge chunk of change difference.c. Dedicated teleconverter: A nice feature that's not worth $2600 (list) and $5000 (street).

A birder can still get a Nikon 200-400 brand new + a brand spanking new d800 that has a "built in" 1.2 (25MP files) and 1.5 (16MP files) teleconverter for less than just the 200-400/1.4x will cost when it comes out (if it comes out). New lenses don't get discounted for a long time, unless they are dogs that don't sell. The 400/2.8 II is still $11,500 at your favorite dealers. A sports photographer is 80% of the way to a D4 with the price difference.

I did the math. I bought the Nikon. I also bought a 5D3 because I have a fantastic array of Canon lenses. Oh, my difference in price is also a 5D3 + 24-105 kit + 600EX-RT.

Smirkypants, when you cite 77% more than your Nikon 200-400 f4, of course a number of factors come into play: a) you have a refurbished item that is always cheaper, b) the Nikon lens is an older design / model (so while it's a good lens from all accounts, it's street price is understandably lower than a new lens), c) the Nikon doesn't have the dedicated and built in 1.4x teleconverter!Paul

a. Older design: May 2010 is an old design?b. Refurbished: It's $7000 new (street) and the list is $8400. Still a huge chunk of change difference.c. Dedicated teleconverter: A nice feature that's not worth $2600 (list) and $5000 (street).

A birder can still get a Nikon 200-400 brand new + a brand spanking new d800 that has a "built in" 1.2 (25MP files) and 1.5 (16MP files) teleconverter for less than just the 200-400/1.4x will cost when it comes out (if it comes out). New lenses don't get discounted for a long time, unless they are dogs that don't sell. The 400/2.8 II is still $11,500 at your favorite dealers. A sports photographer is 80% of the way to a D4 with the price difference.

I did the math. I bought the Nikon. I also bought a 5D3 because I have a fantastic array of Canon lenses. Oh, my difference in price is also a 5D3 + 24-105 kit + 600EX-RT.

IN-SANE.

Smirkypants,

a. I said 'older design' not 'old'. Nikon's 200-400 f/4 is older than Canon's yet to be released one. Fact.b. Your post was comparing a list price with a refurbished price and citing 77% difference. I was pointing out you can't compare apples to oranges. Fact.c. I never made any indication of the value for money of the Canon vs Nikon, but again pointing out that the Nikon doesn't have a teleconverter built in. One can't compare apples with pears either. Fact.

I never made any reference to the Nikon D800's 'megapixel cropping ability', as that wasn't in the post I was commenting on. There are so many variables, the post I made commented on the need to accurately compare apples with apples. Fact.

It's not true that new lenses 'don't get discounted for a long time unless they are dogs that don't sell'. Even recently (ie in the last few years), I've bought a number of recently released lenses (Canon 70-300mm L, Canon 100mm macro, Canon 15-85mm, Sigma 10-20mm EX, etc) that were released under a year earlier, for substantial discounts compared to the initial street prices.

One needs to know where to look and how to buy to obtain such savings. All my lenses I bought new (not used, not refurbished, not display models), and are exceptional copies - ie sharp, boxed, etc. I have had friends who have done the same, also with other brands. I'm not saying all lenses get cheap after a few weeks or months. Therefore my statement remains: Fact.

If I was in your shoes I might have also got the Nikon 200-400mm, and maybe a Nikon 800D. I have a number of friends who have the Nikon 200-400mm f4 lens and take great photos with it, just as I have friends with other tele lenses (Canon, Sigma, etc) - and who take great photos with those lenses.

As I've said for many years, it's the photographer that truly counts at the end of the day. Of course having appropriate quality equipment is very important too, particularly in challenging photographic situations... and I've had my share of these too.

All the best with your photography. After all that is what it's all about. And I will continue to enjoy my photography.

Paul

Logged

I appreciate using my 7D and 350D cameras along with a host of lenses & many accessories to capture quality photos, and share with friends.